Agricultural Best Management Practice Systems Catalogue. NYS Soil and Water Conservation Committee

Transcription

1 Agricultural Best Management Practice Systems Catalogue NYS Soil and Water Conservation Committee April 16,

2 TABLE OF CONTENTS Table of Contents 1 Page(s) Table 1 Management Practices with Component Practices 2 5 Table 2 Agricultural Management Systems by Category and Lifespan 6 7 Agricultural System Descriptions System Name Access Control System 8 10 Agrichemical Handling and Storage System Composting System Animal Erosion Control System Structural Feed Management System Integrated Pest Management System Irrigation Water Management System Livestock Heavy Use Area Runoff Management System Manure and Agricultural Waste Treatment System Nutrient Management System Cultural Pathogen Management System Petroleum and Oil Products Storage System Prescribed Rotational Grazing System Process Wash Water Management System Riparian Buffer System Silage Leachate Control and Treatment System Soil Conservation System Cultural Stream Corridor and Shoreline Management System Waste Storage and Transfer System

3 Table I Management Practice Systems with Potential Components Access Control System Access Road May 2011 Access Control May 2011 Animal Trails and Walkways Dec 2010 Fence Oct 2013 Field Border May 2011 Heavy Use Area Protection Dec 2011 Pond July 2012 Pumping Plant Dec 2011 Spring Development June 2007 Stream Crossing May 2011 Structure for Water Control July 2007 Water Well May 2011 Watering Facility May 2011 Agrichemical Handling and Storage System Access Road May 2011 Access Control May 2011 Agrichemical Handling Facility Feb 2012 Diversion Dec 2010 Grassed Waterway Apr 2009 Livestock Pipeline July 2012 Pumping Plant Dec 2011 Underground Outlet May 2011 Waste Recycling Dec 2011 Composting System Animal Access Road May 2011 Animal Mortality Facility May 2011 Composting Facility May 2011 Diversion Dec 2010 Heavy Use Area Protection Dec 2011 Roofs and Covers May 2011 Vegetated Treatment Area Apr 2009 Waste Storage Facility July 2012 Waste Transfer Sept 2009 Erosion Control Systems Structural Conservation Cover May 2011 Critical Area Planting May 2011 Diversion Dec 2010 Fence Oct 2013 Filter Strip May 2011 Grade Stabilization Structure Oct 1985 Grassed Waterway Apr 2009 Erosion Control Systems Structural (continued) Land Clearing Sept 2003 Lined Waterway or Outlet May 2011 Rock Barrier July 2002 Sediment Basin Aug 2010 Subsurface Drainage Dec 2012 Terrace Apr 2009 Underground Outlet May 2011 Water and Sediment Control Basin (WASCOB) Apr 2009 Feed Management Feed Management Oct 2012 Integrated Pest Management System Conservation Cover May 2011 Conservation Crop Rotation Dec 2011 Field Border May 2011 Filter Strip May 2011 Forage Harvest Management Dec 2010 Herbaceous Weed Control Dec 2010 Integrated Pest Management Sept 2010 Irrigation Water Management Dec 2011 Waste Recycling Dec 2011 Irrigation Water Management Integrated Pest Management Sept 2010 Irrigation Pipeline Dec 2011 Irrigation Reservoir Dec 2011 Irrigation System Micro irrigation Dec 2011 Sprinkler System Oct 2013 Irrigation System Surface and Subsurface Dec 2011 Irrigation System Tailwater Recovery Jan 2008 Irrigation Water Management Dec 2011 Nutrient Management Jan 2013 Pumping Plant Dec 2011 Water Well May 2011 Livestock Heavy Use Area Runoff Management System Access Control May 2011 Access Road May

4 Livestock Heavy Use Area Runoff Management System (continued) Animal Trails and Walkways Dec 2010 Conservation Cover May 2011 Constructed Wetland May 2011 Critical Area Planting May 2011 Diversion Dec 2010 Fence Oct 2013 Grassed Waterway Apr 2009 Heavy Use Area Protection Dec 2011 Lined Waterway or Outlet May 2011 Pumping Plant Dec 2011 Roof Runoff Structure May 2010 Roofs and Covers May 2011 Sediment Basin Aug 2010 Subsurface Drainage Dec 2012 Underground Outlet May 2011 Vegetated Treatment Area Apr 2009 Waste Separation Facility Oct 2013 Waste Storage Facility July 2012 Waste Transfer Sept 2009 Water and Sediment Control Basin (WASCOB) Apr 2009 Watering Facility May 2011 Manure and Agricultural Waste Treatment Systems Amendments for Treatment of Agricultural Waste Oct 2013 Anaerobic Digester, Controlled Temperature May 2010 Composting Facility May 2011 Constructed Wetland May 2011 Heavy Use Area Protection Dec 2011 Pumping Plant Dec 2011 Roofs and Covers May 2011 Waste Separation Facility Oct 2013 Waste Storage Facility July 2012 Waste Transfer Sept 2009 Waste Treatment Oct 2013 Nutrient Management Cultural Nutrient Management Jan 2013 Waste Management System Apr 2007 Pathogen Management Access Control May 2011 Pathogen Management (continued) Amendments for the Treatment of Agricultural Waste Oct 2013 Anaerobic Digester, Controlled Temperature May 2010 Composting Facility May 2011 Constructed Wetland May 2011 Diversion Dec 2010 Fence Oct 2013 Heavy Use Area Protection Dec 2011 Nutrient Management Jan 2013 Pathogen Management Jan 2008 Roofs and Covers May 2011 Waste Management System Apr 2007 Waste Separation Facility Oct 2013 Waste Storage Facility July 2012 Waste Transfer Sept 2009 Waste Treatment Oct 2013 Well Water Testing May 2011 Petroleum and Oil Products Storage System Access Control May 2011 Access Road May 2011 Agricultural Secondary Containment Facility Nov 2010 Conservation Cover May 2011 Heavy Use Area Protection Dec 2011 Prescribed Rotational Grazing System Access Control May 2011 Access Road May 2011 Animal Trails and Walkways Dec 2010 Brush Management May 2010 Fence Oct 2013 Field Border May 2011 Forage and Biomass Planting Sept 2010 Forage Harvest Management Dec 2010 Grazing Land Mechanical Treatment May 2011 Heavy Use Area Protection Dec 2011 Herbaceous Weed Control Dec 2010 Livestock Pipeline July 2012 Pond July 2012 Prescribed Grazing May 2011 Pumping Plant Dec 2011 Spring Development June

5 Prescribed Rotational Grazing System (continued) Stream Crossing May 2011 Structure for Water Control July 2007 Subsurface Drainage Dec 2012 Underground Outlet May 2011 Water Well May 2011 Watering Facility May 2011 Process Wash Water Management System Constructed Wetland May 2011 Heavy Use Area Protection Dec 2011 Pumping Plant Dec 2011 Structure for Water Control July 2007 Subsurface Drainage Dec 2012 Vegetated Treatment Area Apr 2009 Waste Separation Facility Oct 2013 Waste Storage Facility July 2012 Waste Transfer Sept 2009 Waste Treatment Lagoon Aug 2006 Riparian Buffer System Access Control May 2011 Access Road May 2011 Animal Trails and Walkways Dec 2010 Brush Management May 2010 Conservation Cover May 2011 Critical Area Planting May 2011 Fence Oct 2013 Filter Strip May 2011 Forage and Biomass Planting Sept 2010 Grassed Waterway Apr 2009 Herbaceous Weed Control Dec 2010 Integrated Pest Management Sept 2010 Lined Waterway of Outlet May 2011 Riparian Forest Buffer May 2011 Riparian Herbaceous Cover May 2011 Stream Crossing May 2011 Structure for Water Control July 2007 Tree/Shrub Establishment Dec 2011 Tree/Shrub Site Preparation Mar 2007 Water and Sediment Control Basin (WASCOB) Apr 2009 Silage Leachate Control and Treatment System Conservation Crop Rotation Dec 2011 Constructed Wetland May 2011 Silage Leachate Control and Treatment System (continued) Dike Dec 2012 Diversion Dec 2010 Fence Oct 2013 Heavy Use Area Protection Dec 2011 Sprinkler System Oct 2013 Irrigation Water Management Dec 2011 Pumping Plant Dec 2011 Sediment Basin Aug 2010 Structure for Water Control July 2007 Subsurface Drainage Dec 2012 Vegetated Treatment Area Apr 2009 Waste Separation Facility Oct 2013 Waste Storage Facility July 2012 Waste Transfer Sept 2009 Waste Treatment Lagoon Aug 2006 Soil Conservation System Cultural Conservation Crop Rotation Dec 2011 Conservation Cover May 2011 Contour Farming Jan 2008 Cover Crop May 2011 Forage and Biomass Planting Sept 2010 Mulching Dec 2011 Residue and Tillage Management Dec 2011 Strip Cropping Apr 2009 Stream Corridor and Shoreline Management System Access Control May 2011 Clearing and Snagging May 2011 Critical Area Planting May 2011 Obstruction Removal Sept 2010 Open Channel Oct 1987 Riparian Forest Buffer May 2011 Riparian Herbaceous Cover May 2011 Stream Crossing May 2011 Stream Habitat Improvement and Management May 2011 Streambank and Shoreline Protection May 2011 Tree/Shrub Establishment Dec 2011 Tree/Shrub Site Preparation Mar

6 Waste Storage and Transfer System Access Control May 2011 Access Road May 2011 Composting Facility May 2011 Diversion Dec 2010 Fence Oct 2013 Heavy Use Area Protection Dec 2011 Hedgerow Planting May 2011 Nutrient Management Jan 2013 Pond Sealing or Lining Bentonite Sealant May 2011 Pond Sealing or Lining Compacted Clay Treatment May 2011 Pond Sealing or Lining Flex Membrane July 2012 Pond Sealing or Lining Soil Dispersant May 2011 Pumping Plant Dec 2011 Roofs and Covers May 2011 Waste Separation Facility Oct 2013 Subsurface Drainage Dec 2012 Waste Facility Closure Oct 2013 Waste Storage Facility July 2012 Waste Transfer Sept 2009 Waste Treatment Oct 2013 Waste Treatment Lagoon Aug

7 Table II. Agricultural Management Systems by Category and Lifespan The following listed lifespans are for BMP Systems implemented under the New York State Non Point Source Pollution Abatement and Control Grant Program. Management System Lifespan indicates the minimum term that Operation and Maintenance MUST be performed on the management system. Implementation of an Operation and Maintenance (O&M) plan is required to assure efficient operation of the system and may extend the system lifespan beyond the minimum term. Management System Design Criteria is variable depending on the component practices that are used. Management System Categories Management System Operational Vegetative Structural Management System Lifespan Access Control System 10 years Agrichemical Handling and 10 years Storage System Composting System 10 years Animal Erosion Control System 10 years Structural Feed Management System 1 year Integrated Pest 1 year Management System Irrigation Water 1 years Management System Livestock Heavy Use Area 10 years Runoff Management System Manure and Agricultural 10 years Waste Treatment System Nutrient Management 1 year System Cultural Pathogen Management 10 years System Petroleum and Oil Products 10 years Storage System Prescribed Rotational 10 years Grazing System Process Wash Water 10 years Management System Riparian Buffer System 10 years 6

8 Management System Categories Management System Operational Vegetative Structural Management System Lifespan Silage Leachate Control and Treatment System Soil Conservation System Cultural Stream Corridor and Shoreline Management System Waste Storage and Transfer System 10 years 1 5 years 10 years 10 years 7

9 Access Control System DEFINITION An Access Control System provides for the permanent exclusion of livestock from a waterbody or hydrologically active area to protect water quality. WATER QUALITY PURPOSE To prevent the direct deposition of manure and urine into waterbodies and hydrologically active areas, and to protect the stability of the banks of a waterbody from livestock traffic. POLLUTANT CONTROLLED Nutrients, pathogens, bio chemical oxygen demand, sediment and thermal modification WHERE USED On farmsteads, pastures, and fields where livestock have access to surface waterbodies and hydrologically active areas, and a resource concern has been identified. SYSTEM DESCRIPTION An Access Control System involves the use of appropriate fence and associated components to exclude livestock from having significant direct access to surface waters and hydrologically active areas to protect water quality. Other conservation practices that provide an alternative source of water, and/or allow for the controlled access to, or crossing of streams may be included in the system. SYSTEM EFFECTIVENESS Eliminating access of livestock to waterbodies and hydrologically active areas prevents direct nutrient, pathogen, and organic matter contributions by livestock as well as protecting bank stability and vegetation which leads to less erosion and improved wildlife habitat. IMPACTS ON SURFACE WATER Beneficial reduces the risk of contamination from nutrients, pathogens, bio chemical oxygen demand, sediment, and thermal modification. IMPACTS ON GROUND WATER Neutral It may be beneficial in areas where groundwater is recharged directly from surface waterbodies or there is a direct surface connection to groundwater. IMPACTS ON OTHER RESOURCES (OFF SITE) Soil: Beneficial by excluding livestock from the banks of waterbodies helping to maintain bank stability and vegetation reducing soil erosion and sedimentation. Air: Neutral 8

10 Plants: Beneficial by excluding livestock from the banks of waterbodies helping to maintain bank vegetation. Animals: Beneficial as it can help protect riparian vegetation that in turn provides habitat, wildlife corridors and water quality benefits. Humans: Beneficial by improving overall water quality and recreational opportunities. Energy: Neutral, but may be negative if alternative water requires pumping. ADVANTAGES TO FARM Easy to implement Relative low cost Could improve neighbor relations due to livestock control and increased aesthetics in the stream corridor DISADVANTAGES TO FARM Requires fence maintenance and potential replacement after flood events. Often requires the installation of an alternative water supply system. SYSTEM LIFESPAN Ten (10) years COST Each Agricultural Management System is unique and must be customized to the situation in which it is employed resulting in a wide and variable range in cost. Some factors impacting cost include the type of livestock involved, the length and type of fence needed, the need for alternative water, and stream crossings. OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE Each Agricultural Management System is unique and must be customized for every situation. The following are generally key components to the operation and maintenance of the system: Basic maintenance to fence, crossings, and watering stations is needed. Significant flooding may result in the need for repair or replacement. See the documents in Section 4 of the NRCS Field Office Technical Guide (efotg) under the specific conservation practice standard being utilized for additional information on operation and maintenance needs. MISCELLANEOUS COMMENTS Components that result in a complete system that eliminates a resource concern may be eligible for cost sharing. Compliance with local and state laws should be adhered to including the need for Erosion and Sediment Control plans for disturbances over 1 acre, contacting Underground Utilities Protection before excavation, contacting SHPO and others as applicable. Stream crossings and other activities that disturb streambanks may require permits. 9

11 NRCS STANDARDS TO UTILIZE* For the most current information on each NRCS Standard, please go to the efotg at use the drop box in the left side to reach Section IV Practice Standards and Specifications, click on the folder for Conservation Practices and locate the appropriate practice. Under each practice, you will find, at the minimum, the practice standard. You may also find: a Statement of Work; Practice Guideline; Operation and Maintenance Plan; Specification Sheet; Standard Drawing; and other document that will assist in the planning, installation or operation of the practice. NRCS Name Standard # Reportable Item Date Life Span Access Control 472 Acre May Access Road 560 Feet May Animal Trails and Walkways 575 Feet Dec Fence 382 Feet Oct Field Border 386 Feet May Heavy Use Area Protection 561 Acre Dec Pond 378 Number July Pumping Plant 533 Number Dec Spring Development 574 Number June Stream Crossing 578 Number May Structure for Water Control 587 Number July Water Well 642 Number May Watering Facility 614 Number May *This is a listing of the primary BMPs to utilize but is not all inclusive and other NY NRCS Standards could be utilized. Please check with your local SWCC representative for approval. REFERENCES USDA NRCS efotg: Pasture Management AEM Tier 2 Worksheet: Stream and Floodplain Management AEM Tier 2 Worksheet: 10

12 Agrichemical Handling and Storage System DEFINITION A permanent structure, with associated operation and maintenance procedures, that includes an impervious surface to provide an environmentally safe on farm area for agri chemical storage, handling, mixing, loading, recovery, and rinsing. WATER QUALITY PURPOSE To reduce the potential for soil, groundwater, and surface water contamination during agrichemical storage, mixing, loading, unloading, rinsing, and recycling operations. POLLUTANT CONTROLLED Agrichemicals (i.e. pesticides, fertilizers, etc.) WHERE USED On farms where current methods of storing, mixing, loading, and unloading of agri chemicals; and the rinsing of equipment and/or agrichemical containers are polluting, or have the potential to pollute ground and/or surface waters ; and a resource concern has been identified. SYSTEM DESCRIPTION An agrichemical mixing facility consists of a watertight containment structure comprised of a concrete pad and all necessary equipment for pumping, transferring, and storing water used in agrichemical mixing, loading, unloading, and rinsing operations. The size of the pad and storage capacity is related to the volume and size of the largest spray tank on the pad. Containment storage vessels incorporated into the facility design allow for the recovery of agrichemical, rinsate storage, plus handling/mixing/recovery/disposal. Surface runoff from a 25 year, 24 hour duration storm event is diverted away from the facility. A roof and sidewalls may be used to shelter the facility from rain, snow and ice, preventing precipitation from accumulating on the pad and contaminating runoff. SYSTEM EFFECTIVENESS Little or no information exists on the documented effectiveness of agrichemical handling facilities on water quality improvement. Much is known about water quality impacts when these facilities are not available for agrichemical handling and rinsing operations. A recent study of commercial pesticide mixing and loading sites in Wisconsin, without pesticide handling facilities, found that two thirds of the sites had significant groundwater contamination. Pesticides were detected in groundwater at more than half of these sites, with concentrations exceeding groundwater standards at one third of the sites surveyed. Officials and the pesticide industry in Wisconsin recognized that use of agrichemical mixing facilities minimize the potential for surface and groundwater contamination. 11

13 IMPACTS ON SURFACE WATER Beneficial IMPACTS ON GROUND WATER Beneficial IMPACTS ON OTHER RESOURCES (OFF SITE) Soil: Beneficial as it greatly reduces the risk of soil contamination due to leaks and spills. Air: Beneficial as it greatly reduces the risk of air contamination resulting from leaks and spills. Plants: Neutral Animals: Neutral Human: Beneficial as it improves environmental safety. Energy: Neutral ADVANTAGES TO FARM Improves environmental safety by preventing contamination of ground and surface water from routine use and accidental spills. Allows compliance with federal and state regulations. Enhances owner / operator management. Promotes recycling of rinse water as tank make up water. Reduces liability risk. DISADVANTAGES TO FARM Can be very expensive. Must perform maintenance frequently and diligently to ensure proper facility operation and water source protection. Expansive cropland acreage makes it difficult to pick one central location to protect and utilize exclusively. SYSTEM LIFESPAN Ten (10) years COST Each Agricultural Management System is unique and must be customized to the situation in which it is employed resulting in a wide and variable range in cost. OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE Each Agricultural Management System is unique and must be customized for every situation. The following are generally key components to the operation and maintenance of the system: An Emergency Action Plan should be a part of the written O&M plan, in case of an accidental agrichemical spill, exposure, fire or other incident that could adversely affect 12

14 environmental health. The plan should include a record keeping component to accurately log spills, exposure, fire or other incidents. Safe agrichemical handling procedures and frequent maintenance are critical to the performance of any agrichemical mixing facility. The proper disposal/utilization of rinsate, exterior wash water, accumulated sediment and spilled wastewater must be accomplished in accordance with the pesticide labeling requirements and federal, state and local laws and codes. Operator must perform periodic checks of any backflow prevention devices, inspect the pad and sump for cracks and leaks, clean the sump and pad between different chemical mixing operations and remove sediment accumulation from the sump. Personal protective equipment must be used during O&M procedures. Accurate records indicating maintenance, cleaning and inspection of equipment are necessary. Pesticide containers are to be triple rinsed and properly recycled. See the documents in Section 4 of the NRCS field Office Technical Guide (efotg) under the specific conservation practice standard being utilized for additional information on operation and maintenance needs. MISCELLANEOUS COMMENTS Components that result in a complete system that eliminates a resource concern may be eligible for cost sharing. Compliance with Federal, State, and local laws should be adhered to including the need for Erosion and Sediment Control Plans for disturbances over one acre, contacting Underground Utilities Protection before excavation, contacting SHPO and others as applicable. NYSDEC recommends that all pesticide rinsates, including wash waters from cleaning of spray equipment, should be collected and stored above ground. Stored rinsates should be recycled for future mixing with the same concentrates. An agrichemical storage facility should have good air ventilation and an impervious floor and sides to contain spills and leaks. The building should be locked at all times and be located adjacent to the pad. NRCS STANDARDS TO UTILIZE For the most current information on each NRCS Standard, please go to the efotg at use the drop box in the left side to reach Section IV Practice Standards and Specifications, click on the folder for Conservation Practices and locate the appropriate practice. Under each practice, you will find, at the minimum, the practice standard. You may also find: a Statement of Work; Practice Guideline; Operation and Maintenance Plan; Specification Sheet; Standard Drawing; and other document that will assist in the planning, installation or operation of the practice. 13

15 NRCS Name Standard # Reportable Item Date Life Span Access Control 472 Acre May Access Road 560 Feet May Agrichemical Handling Facility 309 Number Feb Diversion 362 Feet Dec Grassed Waterway 412 Acre April Heavy Use Area Protection 561 Acre Dec Livestock Pipeline 516 Feet July Pumping Plant 533 Number Dec Underground Outlet 620 Feet May Waste Recycling 633 Tons Dec *This is a listing of the primary BMPs to utilize but is not all inclusive and other NRCS Standards could be utilized. Please check with your local SWCC representative for approval. REFERENCES USDA NRCS efotg: AEM Tier 2 Worksheet Pesticide Storage, Mixing and Loading: 14

16 Composting System Animal DEFINITION An on farm system to safely facilitate the treatment or disposal through controlled aerobic decomposition of livestock and poultry carcasses, by micro organisms into a biologically stable, soil enriching material useful for soil amendment. This system is especially useful when rendering services are not available or too costly. WATER QUALITY PURPOSE To have a system for the safe decomposition and ultimate utilization of nutrients from animal composting in a safe environmental manner. POLLUTANT CONTROLLED Pathogens, Nutrients WHERE USED On farms where safe disposal of livestock carcasses is needed. SYSTEM DESCRIPTION A facility to safely compost animal carcasses. To protect surface and groundwater and allow for proper composting of animal carcasses, the facility may be located on lower permeability soils, an improved pad, or be a building with a roof and concrete floor, depending on the operation and need. Clean surface water will be diverted from the site and all contaminated run off will be contained and treated. Composting on the farm is accomplished by mixing an energy source (carbonaceous material: wood chips, sawdust, straw, corn cobs, or well bedded horse manure) with a nutrient source (nitrogenous material: animal carcasses,) in a prescribed manner under aerobic conditions. Microorganisms (primarily bacteria and fungi) break down the raw organic waste under controlled conditions. Air, water, nutrients, surface area, temperature and ph are all important factors in the composting process. Two types of carcass composting operations are common for on farm use and either can be managed outside or in a controlled environment or building: The most common Static Piles carcasses are placed on bulky, high carbon organic material (such as wood chips) and then covered with more organic material and not turned during the composting process. Correct moisture content and bulk density facilitate air movement throughout the pile. Aerated Windrows organic materials are formed into long narrow piles, called windrows, and turned periodically with power equipment to aerate the piles and promote the composting process. This method is the most suitable for smaller 15

17 carcasses, such as poultry and but has been done on larger scales in the Midwest. SYSTEM EFFECTIVENESS Unsafe disposal of animal carcasses can be a large source of pathogens and nutrients. Proper composting, including the collection and treatment of any leachate from the process, greatly reduces the issues with pathogens and when the final product is land applied in accordance with a Nutrient Management Plan, the loss of nutrients is negligible. IMPACTS ON SURFACE WATER Beneficial Improper disposal of carcasses can cause surface water contamination and a proper composting facility can eliminate the potential. IMPACTS ON GROUND WATER Beneficial Improper burial or improper composting on well drained soils, shallow to fractured rock or near high groundwater tables can have negative effects on ground water quality. Proper composting facility will be installed in proper soils or lined and will not affect ground water quality. IMPACTS ON OTHER RESOURCES (OFF SITE) Soil: Beneficial. Nutrients and organic matter will be incorporated in the soil and approve the soil health and nutrient values. Air: Beneficial. Improper disposal or improperly operated composting facilities can cause major air quality issues on a farm. Properly operated and maintained composting facilities will create little to no odor. Plants: Beneficial. Plants will benefit from increased nutrients in the soil. Animals: Beneficial. Properly operated composting facilities will not be an attractant to wild animals or vectors. Human: Beneficial. Protection of ground and surface water, odor control and vector control will all benefit humans. Energy: Negative. Increased energy will be needed to properly run a composting system which requires increased equipment time over some forms of disposal (dragging carcass into woodlot) but energy use can be less than needed for proper burial. ADVANTAGES TO FARM Can be done simply, at low cost and may not require engineering assistance (for nonstructural composting facilities). Can utilize on farm waste products for cover material, such as refusals, spoiled feed, etc. Compost can be used as a soil amendment increasing soil tilth and water holding capacity. DISADVANTAGES TO FARM Requires input (and possible purchase) of materials for composting, such as wood chips 16

18 Increased cost of initial investment (can be expensive, especially if a building or roofed structure) Higher degree of management by farm Requires monitoring for run off, temperature, proper covering with suitable materials Some practices may require a SPDES permit for site disturbance SYSTEM LIFESPAN Ten (10) years COST Each Agricultural Management System is unique and must be customized to the situation in which it is employed resulting in a wide and variable range in cost. Costs can range from little to no out of pocket cost when there is a readily available supply of high carbon material for a base or can be very expensive for a building where large volumes of material are composted range $0 to $150,000. OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE Each Agricultural Management System is unique and must be customized for every situation. The following are generally key components to the operation and maintenance of the system: Maintain correct operating temperatures, proper aeration, carbon to nitrogen (C: N) ratio, and perform periodic testing of compost. Check for run off, kill zones or other signs of nutrient loss after storm events. See the documents in Section 4 of the NRCS Field Office Technical Guide (efotg) under the specific practice standard being utilized for additional information on operation and maintenance needs. MISCELLANEOUS COMMENTS Testing of compost for nutrients or heavy metals can be arranged through the local Cornell Cooperative Extension or through the Cornell Nutrient Analysis Laboratory. This practice may be eligible for cost sharing. Compliance with local and state laws should be adhered to including the need for Erosion and Sediment Control plans for disturbances over 1 acre, contacting Underground Utilities Protection before excavation, contacting SHPO and others as applicable. NRCS STANDARDS TO UTILIZE * For the most current information on each NRCS Standard, please go to the efotg at use the drop box in the left side to reach Section IV Practice Standards and Specifications, click on the folder for Conservation Practices and locate the appropriate practice. Under each practice, you will find, at the minimum, the practice standard. You may also find: a Statement of Work; Practice Guideline; Operation and Maintenance Plan; Specification Sheet; Standard Drawing; and other document that will assist in the planning, installation or operation of the practice. 17

19 NRCS Name Standard # Reportable Item Date Life Span Access Road 560 Feet May Animal Mortality Facility 316 Number May Composting Facility 317 Number May Diversion 362 Feet Dec Heavy Use Area Protection 561 Acre Dec Roof and Covers 367 Number May Vegetative Treatment Area 635 Acre April Waste Storage Facility 313 Number July Waste Transfer 634 Number Sept * This is a listing of the primary BMPs to utilize but is not all inclusive and other NRCS Standards could be utilized. Please check with your local SWCC representative for approval. REFERENCES National Engineering Handbook Part 637, Chapter 2 Composting (NEH , Dead Animal Composting), National Engineering Handbook Part 651, Agricultural Waste Management Field Handbook, Chapter 10 Mortality Management (NEH ), NRCS or comparable extension publication. Bonhotal, J., L Telega, J. Petzen. Natural Rendering: Composting Livestock Mortality and Butcher Waste Cornell Waste Management Institute: Northeast Regional Agricultural Engineering Service publication No. 54, On Farm Composting Handbook, Cornell Cooperative Extension, Ithaca, NY. AEM Tier 2 Worksheet Waste Disposal: 18

20 Erosion Control System Structural DEFINITION The construction of an erosion control system to control the loss of soil from sheet, ephemeral, rill or gully erosion on agricultural lands outside of the farmstead or production area. This includes systems utilizing terraces, diversions, water and sediment control basins (WASCoBs), waterways (both grassed and lined) and associated earthmoving practices in a system. WATER QUALITY PURPOSE To reduce all forms of erosion and thereby reducing sediment delivery to waterbodies. This includes shortening slope lengths, cutting off sheet and concentrated flows from adjacent landuses, stabilizing gullies and providing safe outlets for flowing waters. POLLUTANT CONTROLLED Sediment, nutrients and pathogens WHERE USED On erodible land, in both crop fields and pastures, where soil erosion and runoff must be controlled and the use of rotation, minimum tillage or seeding does not or cannot limit the erosion to acceptable levels. This system is not for use in the farmstead area. SYSTEM DESCRIPTION This system can be one practice or several that are designed to handle the run off from a 10 year 24 hour frequency storm event, as a minimum. Terraces, diversion and WASCoB s are generally constructed across the slope, usually on the contour to intercept and conduct surface runoff at a non erosive velocity to stable outlets, reducing ephemeral and gully erosion. They control erosion by shortening slope length and regulating surface runoff. They can outlet into established grassed waterways, flat vegetated areas or other stabilized outlets. They also can be total storage structures that release the flow through underground outlets within 24 to 48 hours, depending on crops grown. These systems also act as sediment traps and help to reduce sediment bound pollutants in surface run off. This system will also be used for the construction of waterways; grassed, lined or stonecentered, which are used to convey concentrated flows down slope to protected outlets to prevent gully erosion or to act as outlets for other erosion control practices. On slopes of less than 1% where out of bank flow will not cause erosion or property damage, the confinement of flow is not a design requirement. Structures can be cropped, seeded to grasses and legumes to stabilize the slopes or lined with another material, such as rock, when velocities require. 19

21 Soil and water resources are often further conserved when structural erosion control practices are paired with cultural soil conservation practices (i.e. crop rotation, strip cropping, cover crop, conservation tillage, etc.) and nutrient management, to further reduce pollutant transport and loss. When this system is funded by the NYS Agricultural Nonpoint Source Abatement and Control Program (ANSACP), a complete system of BMPs meeting NRCS Standards must result. SYSTEM EFFECTIVENESS Structural erosion control practices are effective at reducing soil loss significantly as well as limiting nutrient losses and runoff. IMPACTS ON SURFACE WATER Beneficial Terraces, diversions, waterways and WASCoB s reduce erosion by controlling surface runoff and gully erosion which lessen loads delivered to the receiving waterbody. Terraces, diversion and WASCoB can also reduce nutrient loading through settling in areas of water retention. IMPACTS ON GROUND WATER Slight to Moderate Can be beneficial in areas where the groundwater is recharged from surface waterbodies. In the absence of a nutrient management plan, terraces and diversions may increase nutrient leaching to groundwater. Impacts on groundwater may be reduced by increasing terrace or diversion release rates, thereby decreasing runoff storage time and potential soil saturation. Diversions decrease the amount of surface runoff infiltrating into the soil, reducing the risk of transporting nutrients and pesticides to groundwater. Waterways generally have little to no impact on ground water. IMPACTS ON OTHER RESOURCES (OFF SITE) Soil: Beneficial to soil resources as soil loss will be diminished. Air: Slightly beneficial and can have beneficial effects as erosion rates are reduced and the possibility that fines in the air will also be reduced. Plants: Neutral Animals: Slightly beneficial improvement to wildlife as cross field practices could provide pathways for wildlife movement. Slight to moderate for fisheries as erosion rates will be lessened and delivery of sediment to waterbodies controlled. Human: Slight to no effect on humans unless sediment reduction in waterbodies for public use are impacted. Energy: Energy use may be slightly higher due to increased tractor use to go around conservation practices instead of normal plowing. ADVANTAGES TO FARM Are relatively easy to design and install. Can be cheap to install for simple practices 20

22 May allow timelier planting and potential yield increases by removing surface runoff. Controls surface runoff and gully and ephemeral erosion. Can provides flood protection for crop fields. Stores runoff up to 48 hours, allowing sediment and sediment bound pollutants to settle out. DISADVANTAGES TO FARM Can take land out of crop production. Systems may need to be in conjunction with other conservation practices such as conservation tillage, crop rotations, and contour or strip cropping to bring soil loss to acceptable levels. Some systems can be very expensive and usually are not considered cost effective management practices in relation to cultural control measures. Require increased maintenance as trapped sediment accumulates in the structure and removal of sediment or reconstruction is required to maintain capacity. Grassed waterways may be unsuitable for areas where a base flow exists (sustained wetness prevents adequate vegetative cover) unless a stone center lining and a subsurface drain and surface inlet are installed. Little impact on runoff volumes. Use may be precluded or have an increased cost if a stable outlet is lacking. SYSTEM LIFESPAN Ten (10) years COST Each Agricultural Management System is unique and must be customized to the situation in which it is employed resulting in a wide and variable range in cost. Costs can range from $1.00 per foot for a cross slope ditch to $10 a foot for storage structures with outlets. OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE Each Agricultural Management System is unique and must be customized for every situation. The following are generally key components to the operation and maintenance of the system that need to be performed annually and after large storm events: Maintain capacity, storage, ridge height and outlets. Clean out inlets for underground outlets. Remove sediment build up and redistribute. Inspect channel cross section for stable side slopes, points of scour, rodent holes, and breaches. Check channel bottom for erosion or excessive scour, deposition of sediment or other obstructions. Outlets should be checked to ensure that they remain adequate, show no sign of erosion or loss of structural integrity. Vegetated structures will need to be periodically mowed. 21

23 See the documents in Section 4 of the NRCS Field Office Technical Guide (efotg) under the specific practice standard being utilized for additional information on operation and maintenance needs. MISCELLANEOUS COMMENTS Component BMPs that result in a complete system meeting appropriate NRCS Standards, and reduce a resource concern may be eligible for cost sharing. Compliance with local and state laws should be adhered to including the need for Erosion and Sediment Control plans for disturbances over 1 acre, contacting Underground Utilities Protection before excavation, contacting SHPO and others as applicable NRCS STANDARDS TO UTILIZE* For the most current information on each NRCS Standard, please go to the efotg at use the drop box in the left side to reach Section IV Practice Standards and Specifications, click on the folder for Conservation Practices and locate the appropriate practice. Under each practice, you will find at the minimum the practice standard. You may also find: a Statement of Work; Practice Guideline, Operation and Maintenance Plan; Specification Sheet; Standard Drawing; and other document that will assist in the planning, installation of operation of the practice. NRCS Name Standard # Reportable Item Date Life Span Conservation Cover 327 Acre May Critical Area Planting 342 Acre May Diversion 362 Feet Dec Fence 382 Feet Oct Filter Strips 393 Acre May Grade Stabilization Structure 410 Number Oct Grassed Waterway 412 Acre April Land Clearing 460 Acre Sept Lined Waterway or Outlet 468 Feet May Rock Barrier 555 Feet July Sediment Basin 350 Number August

24 Subsurface Drainage 606 Feet Dec Terrace 600 Feet April Underground Outlet 620 Feet May Water and Sediment Control Basin 638 Number April 2009` 10 *This is a listing of the primary BMPs to utilize but is not all inclusive and other NRCS Standards could be utilized. Please check with your local SWCC representative for approval. REFERENCES NRCS efotg for NY: AEM Tier 2 Worksheet Soil Management: 23

25 Feed Management System DEFINITION The continual process of providing adequate, not excess, nutrients to dairy animals through the integration of feeding and crop management to reduce nutrient excretion in manure and nutrient accumulation in soil, lower potential pollution risks to water and air resources, and improve farm profitability. WATER QUALITY PURPOSE Reduces the accumulation and potential loss of nitrogen and phosphorus in manure from dairy farms. POLLUTANT CONTROLLED Nutrients, pathogens, biochemical oxygen demand, and ammonia WHERE USED Dairy farms SYSTEM DESCRIPTION Feed management is a continuous improvement process involving benchmarking, planning, implementation, and monitoring. It is facilitated by a feed management specialist and adopted and directed by farm management to meet goals in three areas: 1. improved nutrient use efficiency, homegrown feed utilization, and income over feed cost; 2. crop production and purchased feeds are optimized for the feeding system; and 3. reduced nutrient overfeeding, excretion, and accumulation. Dairy farms using the feed management process pursue those goals often by improving the digestible nutrient content of homegrown feeds produced and fed; accurately estimating feed nutrient intakes by animals and tracking feed inventories; employing scientific standards to determine nutrient requirements and ration levels; and increasing the level of homegrown feeds (forages and/or grains) in the diet. Feed management recommendations should be based on the best available research information. The USDA NRCS Feed Management Standard (NY 592) provides specific technical details and references about planning, implementation, and operation and maintenance. The Cornell Precision Feed Management guidelines and Precision Feed Management Benchmarking tools provide further information for effective feed management with dairy cows. Management of feed rations and forages should be consistent with Cornell recommendations, where available; otherwise National Research Council recommendations should be utilized. 24

26 SYSTEM EFFECTIVENESS Improving a farm s nutrient mass balance (the amount of nutrients imported compared to the amount of nutrients exported) will reduce the amount of nutrients that have the potential to be lost to the environment. Changes in the feeding program can have a significant influence on farm nutrient management and its mass nutrient balance. While it varies widely by farm size and management, a substantial portion of the nutrients imported to dairy farms in the form of purchased (imported) feeds, and to a lesser degree fertilizers, often remains on the farm where they may accumulate in farm soils and may be lost to air and water resources. Farms that intensively manage their feeding program reduce nutrient excretion in the manure, increase feed nutrient utilization, and subsequently improve the farm's mass nutrient balance. A 60% reduction in nitrogen and phosphorus mass nutrient balances has been documented by Cornell University and Cornell Cooperative Extension research on over 40 dairy farms that adopted feed management practices between 2004 and Those dairy farms also realized lower operating costs ($1.33/CWT) and 11% higher milk production that similar sized farms not participating in the feed management process in the region. IMPACTS ON SURFACE WATER Beneficial, including nutrients and pathogens IMPACTS ON GROUND WATER Beneficial, including nutrients and pathogens IMPACTS ON OTHER RESOURCES (OFF SITE) Soil: Beneficial, the soil health and soil conservation often must improve in order to optimize homegrown crop production for herd forage and/or grain needs. Air: Beneficial, as it has the potential to reduce particulate matter from ammonia volatilization and nitrous oxide emissions. Plants: Beneficial, as it can reduce nutrient losses and subsequent impacts on neighboring plant communities. Animals: Beneficial, as it can reduce nutrient losses and subsequent impacts on terrestrial and aquatic habitat. Human: Beneficial, as it can further safeguard drinking water sources, improve land and water resources for recreation, and provide economic growth. Energy: Beneficial, as it can reduce use of transportation fuels for imported feed and fertilizer and improve livestock output per energy input. ADVANTAGES TO FARM Potential to reduce nutrient losses and improve animal and crop production. Potential to improve herd/flock health. Often a positive impact on farm profitability. 25

27 DISADVANTAGES TO FARM Higher level of farm management is required may result in increased labor and equipment costs. Requires additional time and training to adjust to new management strategies. Cost to change management may be prohibitive for some farms. SYSTEM LIFESPAN One (1) year. COST Each Agricultural Management System is unique and must be customized to the situation in which it is employed resulting in a wide and variable range in cost. Costs for feed management depend on several factors, including the size and type of farm, existing level of farm management, feeding and feed storage facilities, history of herd, feed, and other farm records, available equipment, and familiarity with custom operators. Consultation fees for developing and maintaining a feed management plan should be considered in addition to the costs for feed and forage analyses. OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE Each Agricultural Management System is unique and must be customized for every situation. Feed management is a continuous improvement process, involving regular monitoring through benchmarking, planning to address opportunities, implementing those plans, and evaluating the plans via benchmarking. See the documents in Section 4 of the NRCS Field Office Technical Guide (efotg) under the specific conservation practice standard being utilized for additional information on operation and maintenance needs. MISCELLANEOUS COMMENTS See Cornell Feed Management guidelines and Precision Feed Management Benchmarking tools as well as the USDA NRCS Feed Management Standard (NY 592) for specific technical details about planning, implementation, and operation and maintenance. NRCS STANDARDS TO UTILIZE* For the most current information on each NRCS Standard, please go to the efotg at use the drop box in the left side to reach Section IV Practice Standards and Specifications, click on the folder for Conservation Practices and locate the appropriate practice. Under each practice, you will find, at the minimum, the practice standard. You may also find: a Statement of Work; Practice Guideline; Operation and Maintenance Plan; Specification Sheet; Standard Drawing; and other document that will assist in the planning, installation or operation of the practice. 26

28 NRCS Name Standard # Reportable Item Date Life Span Feed Management 592 Animals Units Affected Oct *This is a listing of the primary BMPs to utilize but is not all inclusive and other NRCS Standards could be utilized. Please check with your local SWCC representative for approval. REFERENCES NRCS efotg for NY: Cornell Precision Feed Management: AEM Tier 2 Worksheet Management of Dairy Feed Nutrients: 27

29 Integrated Pest Management System DEFINITION An ecologically based, site specific integrated pest control strategy utilizing a combination of pest prevention, pest avoidance, pest monitoring, and pest suppression strategies coupled with precision application techniques and Best Management Practices when pesticide application is warranted. WATER QUALITY PURPOSE To reduce pesticide use, availability, and losses to the environment in crop and livestock production. POLLUTANT CONTROLLED Pesticides WHERE USED On all agricultural lands where pests will be managed and a resource concern has been identified. SYSTEM DESCRIPTION Integrated Pest Management (IPM) strategies that keep pest populations below economically damaging levels and minimize pest resistance are used to reduce pest management risks to water quality and the environment. Specific IPM techniques include: Prevention activities such as cleaning equipment when leaving an infested area, using pest free seeds and transplants, and irrigation scheduling to limit situations that are conducive to disease development, Avoidance activities such as using pest resistant varieties, crop rotation, refuge management, and maintaining healthy and diverse plant communities, Monitoring activities such as crop scouting, establishing trap crops, degree day modeling and weather forecasting to help target suppression strategies and avoid routine preventative treatments, Suppression activities such as the judicious use of cultural, mechanical, biological, and chemical control methods that reduce or eliminate a pest population or its impacts while minimizing risks to non target organisms. As part of a suppression system, precision application techniques in an IPM system can further minimize pesticide risks to natural resources and humans. Examples of such techniques include: appropriate equipment calibration to include the correct rate, boom height, appropriate nozzle type, nozzle spacing, operating speed and pressure; computer controlled application technologies; and advanced technology equipment. 28